For the record, Anita's column For Position Only is indeed an opnion column, not a place to review digital cameras. Creativepro.com posts LOTS of camera reviews. If your'e in the market for one, start here at digital camera department: http://www.creativepro.com/category/home/59.html
Check out our digital camera reviews here: http://www.creativepro.com/category/review/59.html
Here's a ratings grid that summarizes all camera ratings: http://www.creativepro.com/category/revsummary/59.html
And I hope you saw Wednesday's story about infrared-imaging effects-- that's pretty "pro" level to me. See http://www.creativepro.com/files/story_images/feature/16589.html
I'm sorry you feel we wasted your time. Yes, this piece was a little consumer-y for what we normally do, but I find it interesting that a small personal event can make even a seasoned pro change his or her mind about digital photography.
I'm sure you'll find the links I've pointed out worth your time.
I beg to disagree. I may have marveled at the benefits of digital photography that I discovered in my personal experience, but those and other benefits carry over into the professional world as well. Digital cameras are capable of capturing images that are of as high quality as a scan or transparency; if your clients are sending you lousy digitally photographed images, don't blame the technology. They need a lesson in digital image processing--and I venture to bet they wouldn't be able to provide you good scans, either. Not every new technology is right for every design professional, but digital photography is a perfectly viable alternative to scanning in many situations, saving the time and cost associated with the old analog method while providing comparable final quality.
Submitted by Anita Dennis on Thu, 05/16/2002 - 06:34.
This was a nice little article, very well written with a nice tone. Yet, if time is an issue, and it is for me, then I'm not inclined to read content that has nothing to do with non-professional integration of a product. In other words, I am looking for articles that add to my knowledge as a technician, or creative-pro. This article is just one person's opinion on being convinced that a digital camera could be time-effective. Well thats a no brainer! Although sweet and well written as it was, it kind of wasted my time - which I don't appreciate. Do send me reviews of what digital cameras are accomplishing now, or how I can get increased mega pixels for a lower price. I'm in the market for a digital camera and I took time away from what I was doing as a professional to review material not worth my time. Thanks for listening
Submitted by mooregirl on Thu, 05/16/2002 - 07:14.
Sounds like you're well on your way to becoming a digital camera junkie.
Watch out. Next thing you know you'll be getting a color ink jet printer and start doing your OWN prints instead of Shutterfly. (That's what happened to me.)
And that 64 MB card? It's actually unlimited if you travel with a powerbook. Fill it up during the day, download the photos at night. It's an unlimited supply of "film."
Of course the downside to this is that your camera is almost completely obsolete. You got it for Christmas? And it's May? God, woman, that's practically 10 years in human life. (I know. My Nikon Coolpix that I got las April is totally obsolete. Gotta get a new one.)
Submitted by SandeeCohen99 on Thu, 05/16/2002 - 00:51.
I thought this was a forum for discussion of professional-level creative materials and techniques.
Sure digital cameras are great if you don't even care about red eye. If you need a picture of your pet or need to choose a dress long distance. On vacation, save time and money, buy postcards.
For professional purposes, use your 35mm. You will need to scan actual old-fashioned photographs to the size and resolution required for quality reproduction. You will be able to file them, review them and edit the scans as necessary and so will everyone you meet and/or work with. There are no hardware or software limitations involved in reviewing old-fashioned photographs. (Transparencies and professional photographers will still yield best results, but I think we are talking cheap and lazy here.)
Most of my clients have gone to low-end, digital cameras. I get 40 plus photos on a floppy disk. They are about an inch square and full color at 72dpi for about 33k each. It is a complete waste of time to take photos at that quality and resolution.
Learning to use a digital camera is just the tip of the iceberg in digital photography for professional use. Don't waste your time. For now 35mm is still a better choice. Spend the time learning to use Photoshop instead.
We have plenty to offer
For the record, Anita's column For Position Only is indeed an opnion column, not a place to review digital cameras. Creativepro.com posts LOTS of camera reviews. If your'e in the market for one, start here at digital camera department: http://www.creativepro.com/category/home/59.html
Check out our digital camera reviews here: http://www.creativepro.com/category/review/59.html
Here's a ratings grid that summarizes all camera ratings: http://www.creativepro.com/category/revsummary/59.html
And I hope you saw Wednesday's story about infrared-imaging effects-- that's pretty "pro" level to me. See http://www.creativepro.com/files/story_images/feature/16589.html
I'm sorry you feel we wasted your time. Yes, this piece was a little consumer-y for what we normally do, but I find it interesting that a small personal event can make even a seasoned pro change his or her mind about digital photography.
I'm sure you'll find the links I've pointed out worth your time.
Pamela Pfiffner, editor in chief
response to VF
I beg to disagree. I may have marveled at the benefits of digital photography that I discovered in my personal experience, but those and other benefits carry over into the professional world as well. Digital cameras are capable of capturing images that are of as high quality as a scan or transparency; if your clients are sending you lousy digitally photographed images, don't blame the technology. They need a lesson in digital image processing--and I venture to bet they wouldn't be able to provide you good scans, either. Not every new technology is right for every design professional, but digital photography is a perfectly viable alternative to scanning in many situations, saving the time and cost associated with the old analog method while providing comparable final quality.
Interested in what affect professionals
This was a nice little article, very well written with a nice tone. Yet, if time is an issue, and it is for me, then I'm not inclined to read content that has nothing to do with non-professional integration of a product. In other words, I am looking for articles that add to my knowledge as a technician, or creative-pro. This article is just one person's opinion on being convinced that a digital camera could be time-effective. Well thats a no brainer! Although sweet and well written as it was, it kind of wasted my time - which I don't appreciate. Do send me reviews of what digital cameras are accomplishing now, or how I can get increased mega pixels for a lower price. I'm in the market for a digital camera and I took time away from what I was doing as a professional to review material not worth my time. Thanks for listening
Watch out Anita, you're hooked!
Anita,
Sounds like you're well on your way to becoming a digital camera junkie.
Watch out. Next thing you know you'll be getting a color ink jet printer and start doing your OWN prints instead of Shutterfly. (That's what happened to me.)
And that 64 MB card? It's actually unlimited if you travel with a powerbook. Fill it up during the day, download the photos at night. It's an unlimited supply of "film."
Of course the downside to this is that your camera is almost completely obsolete. You got it for Christmas? And it's May? God, woman, that's practically 10 years in human life. (I know. My Nikon Coolpix that I got las April is totally obsolete. Gotta get a new one.)
Doesn't "pro" stand for professional?
I thought this was a forum for discussion of professional-level creative materials and techniques.
Sure digital cameras are great if you don't even care about red eye. If you need a picture of your pet or need to choose a dress long distance. On vacation, save time and money, buy postcards.
For professional purposes, use your 35mm. You will need to scan actual old-fashioned photographs to the size and resolution required for quality reproduction. You will be able to file them, review them and edit the scans as necessary and so will everyone you meet and/or work with. There are no hardware or software limitations involved in reviewing old-fashioned photographs. (Transparencies and professional photographers will still yield best results, but I think we are talking cheap and lazy here.)
Most of my clients have gone to low-end, digital cameras. I get 40 plus photos on a floppy disk. They are about an inch square and full color at 72dpi for about 33k each. It is a complete waste of time to take photos at that quality and resolution.
Learning to use a digital camera is just the tip of the iceberg in digital photography for professional use. Don't waste your time. For now 35mm is still a better choice. Spend the time learning to use Photoshop instead.